(PS) Miner v. Reid ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MADIHA MINER, a.k.a. POCAHONTAS, No. 2:19-cv-01575-TLN-EFB 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 PERRI ARLETTE REID, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff Madiha Miner, a.k.a. Pocahontas (“Plaintiff”) proceeding pro se filed her Complaint 18 on August 14, 2019. (ECF No. 1.) The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On March 24, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on the Plaintiff and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiff did not file 23 objections. 24 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 25 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 26 de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983); see also 27 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 28 1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 2 1. The proposed Findings and Recommendations filed March 24, 2020, are adopted; and 3 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim as set forth in 4 the February 18, 2020 order (ECF No. 6). 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 DATED: April 20, 2020 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28